Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. osu!
  3. Gameplay & Rankings

Decreasing frequency of ranked beatmap income ?

posted
Total Posts
22
Nactra
117 posts
Joined November 2008
Topic Starter
Nactra
now that's a barbaric topic title. guess it deserves to be developped a bit.

As the community grows,there are more and more members that wishes to get their maps ranked. and so do they. it was never an issue before, but now,we're getting 10+ maps every single day. And i think it defeats the purpose of the eternal ranking format - at the moment, it is very easy to reach an high total if you just pass off every single map with mediocre results(i.e fc with mediocre accuracy)
Now,don't get me wrong. i do understand that it is a good thing that having an high rank can't be done without dedication. But having to play more than one hour a day in order to stay competitive feels a bit exagerated. Beside,i think the commmunity is growing to the point where "that map is feats all the ranking crietrias' doesn't make the cut anymore.

So,decreasing the income would imply to change the ranking policy, presumably by allowing only a predetermined number of maps to be ranked each day. those would be voted by beatmap approval team at the end of each day among all the map bubbled at the moment.
That way, only high quality maps would be labelled "ranked' - wich,honestly,would make much more sense.

by extend,it could also mean making the TV size stuff unrankable, beacause it strictly worse than a full song.
those are only suggestions. my point is: reduce the number of maps that get ranked each day, so that the vast majority of players(including newcomers that have 3000+ maps to catch up) doesn't get flooded.

discuss.
Ephemeral
Inland Empire
3,936 posts
Joined April 2009
Ephemeral
This will be fixed with the advent of the new system, which switches the scoring rubric from overall ranked score to overall score on charted maps, which are far fewer in number.

When this will be implemented is still not certain.
awp
osu! Alumni
11,869 posts
Here since the beginning
awp

Nactra wrote:

But having to play more than one hour a day in order to stay competitive
This is the core of your problem. But as Ephemeral said, don't worry, it's going to be solved for you (eventually)
Sushi
osu! Alumni
2,989 posts
Joined October 2008
Sushi
Nactra, I majorly disagree with you.

Yes there may be some policies about quality to change. maybe. But, do not say things like "Number of maps ranked is too high" or "i have to play more than an hour to be competitive".
First, if you want to be competitive somewhere, you need to follow the way things goes. If you can't, that means you don't really want to be the first.
Second, do not forget this game is not only for advanced players who are only playing for ranking. Having to play only 4 min songs is painful, specially for newbies. And generally, Tv size songs are known better than full size. what leads me to my third point.
Third, having maps ranked is not only for scoring, it is to say "this map is good you can play it safely" so to ensure diversity and choice.
Why there are more and more maps? because there are more and more players cho want to have different things.

The world of osu does not gravitate only around scorers, think about it.
LuigiHann
Resident Skinner
4,432 posts
Here since the beginning
LuigiHann
I believe this is the whole point of the monthly ranking charts.
MegaManEXE
710 posts
Here since the beginning
MegaManEXE
If you want to have a high total ranked score and be "competitive", you do need to play "more than an hour a day".

What other games or sports can you play and be "competitive" at and only put in such a minimal time investment?

Also there's nothing wrong with TV Size beatmaps.

Also you don't have to have a high total ranked score to be competitive or good or whatnot. Look at ShaggoN, he's not in the top 100 (hasn't for a while, or at all, as far as I know), and he's just got #1s all over the place so people recognize him as a good player. Total score is pointless because there are so many bad players in the top 100 it's ridiculous, and quite a number of good players who aren't in the top 100.
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201
Law of Conservation of Beatmaps:
dMu / dt = dMr / dt + dMg / dt

Mu: Number of uploaded maps
Mr: Number of ranked maps
Mg: Number of graveyarded maps

(neglecting the latency effect of time a map spends in pending/help)

In other words, these maps have to go somewhere. If they're not ranked, they die. So this request basically is to make the ranking guidelines more stringent. But why should a good map be rejected just because "there are too many beatmaps?"

Ephemeral wrote:

This will be fixed with the advent of the new system, which switches the scoring rubric from overall ranked score to overall score on charted maps, which are far fewer in number.
I disagree with this so much. The reason anyone plays ranked maps instead of pending/grave maps is for the points. If points are only awarded for charted maps, it effectively removes non-charted maps from the scope of vision of most players, making them effectively dead. The "ranking" criteria become getting your map into a chart, which is unreasonably hard. Charts are also limited in number, so if there's a burst of good maps, the bar is raised even higher.
adamskii_uk
324 posts
Joined April 2008
adamskii_uk
I don't think it's necessary to reduce the amount of ranked beatmaps that are released each day, since if there's an exceptionally good player on osu! people will know about it, due to the scoreboards on the most difficult beatmaps, etc. Plus, as LuigiHann said above, we have the monthly ranking charts which would be more appropriate for newcomers, and players who don't spend much time playing osu!.
qlum
481 posts
Joined October 2008
qlum
maybe we should de-rank some old maps from 2007/2008 since they are often no so good.
anonymous_old
0 posts
Here since the beginning
anonymous_old

qlum wrote:

maybe we should de-rank some old maps from 2007/2008 since they are often no so good.
You want ShaggoN to quit osu!?
GladiOol
4,475 posts
Joined August 2008
GladiOol

strager wrote:

qlum wrote:

maybe we should de-rank some old maps from 2007/2008 since they are often no so good.
You want ShaggoN to quit osu!?
yes.
Real1
968 posts
Joined September 2008
Real1

MegaManEXE wrote:

If you want to have a high total ranked score and be "competitive", you do need to play "more than an hour a day".

What other games or sports can you play and be "competitive" at and only put in such a minimal time investment?
I agree. To get into top 100 in any big online game will take ages. That's completely normal.


Total score is pointless because there are so many bad players in the top 100 it's ridiculous, and quite a number of good players who aren't in the top 100.
Eh? To get into top 100, you need to have quite a bit of skill. You need to be able to tackle mostly Hards and very few normals to get that total of ranked score. I know because I'm around there.
awp
osu! Alumni
11,869 posts
Here since the beginning
awp

MetalMario201 wrote:

The reason anyone plays ranked maps instead of pending/grave maps is for the points. If points are only awarded for charted maps, it effectively removes non-charted maps from the scope of vision of most players, making them effectively dead.
This is true and why I feel inclined to support the idea because it interrupts people who play only for points

At the same time it has the effect of, as you say, escaping the vision of the vast majority of players. That would have very negative effects on people who map for the recognition.
K2J
872 posts
Here since the beginning
K2J
I keep trying to write a long rant on why this is a bad idea (particularly because it creates a hierarchy of saying that some ALREADY RANKED maps are "still not good enough" while the current system simply highlights certain maps), but considering it's been over a year since people have said "osz2 is coming soon!", I'm not too worried about this in the near future. I'd prefer, as a compromise, two scores: the original ranked score, and the sum of the chart scores.

On a personal note, I map for recognition. I can't imagine anyone who wouldn't - it's the entire point of the Ranking process, unless you're a community leader who is trying to set examples for Ranking and/or want to "contribute" to the community, neither of which take up a substantial proportion of the mappers. If you remove the concept that a map that meets semi-objective standards of quality is considered good enough to count as a map that contributes to score, and add another layer of approval which depends on personal selection instead of set criteria, it demoralizes a lot of people, especially people like me, who come and do this sort of online thing because we suck at dealing with people.
MegaManEXE
710 posts
Here since the beginning
MegaManEXE

Real1 wrote:

Total score is pointless because there are so many bad players in the top 100 it's ridiculous, and quite a number of good players who aren't in the top 100.
Eh? To get into top 100, you need to have quite a bit of skill. You need to be able to tackle mostly Hards and very few normals to get that total of ranked score. I know because I'm around there.
Let me rephrase: Total score is not nearly an accurate indication of skill level. Yes you have to have some talent to get in the top 100, but the top 100 in total score are not necessarily the 100 best players in the game, so overall it's a largely useless statistic and you shouldn't really feel like you need to have high total score to "be competitive", there's plenty of other ways to exhibit your e-peen on here.
LuigiHann
Resident Skinner
4,432 posts
Here since the beginning
LuigiHann

MetalMario201 wrote:

I disagree with this so much. The reason anyone plays ranked maps instead of pending/grave maps is for the points.
I like to think that, to at least some players, the ranked status indicates "this map is both complete and good." Thus, that's why they'd want to play that one over some random map from the graveyard which is likely to be neither complete nor good. If there were a simpler way to identify maps that are both finished and decent, I would be happy to see it implemented in addition to the ranking system.
Real1
968 posts
Joined September 2008
Real1

MegaManEXE wrote:

Let me rephrase: Total score is not nearly an accurate indication of skill level. Yes you have to have some talent to get in the top 100, but the top 100 in total score are not necessarily the 100 best players in the game, so overall it's a largely useless statistic and you shouldn't really feel like you need to have high total score to "be competitive", there's plenty of other ways to exhibit your e-peen on here.
Ah, that makes more sense. ;)
You're absolutely right.
ouranhshc
2,338 posts
Joined July 2009
ouranhshc
are we really swapping over to a monthly chart system
Natteke
6,538 posts
Joined August 2009
Natteke

qlum wrote:

maybe we should de-rank some old maps from 2007/2008 since they are often no so good.
Lol. That's a bad idea, trust me.

1766 plays - IOSYS - Kanbu de Todomatte Sugu Tokeru ~ Kyouki no Udongein [Hard]-kun
Sup A Noob
555 posts
Joined November 2009
Sup A Noob
MegaManEXE pretty much summed up what I wanted to say.

Just look at the difference in scores between the top and second Singaporean player. It's obvious who's the one grinding beatmaps over and over again. And no I'm not advertising myself.

Once again, score is not a direct indication of skills.
mm201
osu! Alumni
4,495 posts
Joined August 2008
mm201
I could see adding a bonus for charted maps--possibly 2x the ranked points? And I'm open for more stringent ranking guidelines, but they need to be objective and independent from map inflow rate.
K2J
872 posts
Here since the beginning
K2J
Would the new ranked score be the sum of all the chart scores, the scores of all maps that have ever been on a chart, or only of charts/maps that were recently featured (e.g., the ranked score only reflects maps from within the past six months to a year)? I think a rotating system akin to TCG booster packs would be interesting and would help new players from being lost in the shuffle.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 22